To the editor:

I’m asking for some community-wide critical thinking to be applied to the latest request by the Bainbridge Island Park District for the money to purchase yet more space, this time right on the north end of Winslow.

This park levy does not purchase all the land that you view as your travel down North Madison between Sakai Village and St. Cecelia’s Church and east to Highway 305. There are actually three parcels owned by the family selling the land, one of which is scheduled to be developed into 50 homes.

There is nothing particularly lovely or bucolic about this land. It is relatively flat, and the primary trees are only those that block a state highway from view. Given that our other island parks are far more attractive and desirable to visit, why would one chose this location?

The already bought-and-paid-for open spaces in Winslow itself are legion. The open spaces provided by the public schools within a block of this proposed park purchase are walk-able, extensive and well-utilized by the community. They include open fields, baseball fields, a track, and paved, off-street pathways for walking.

The rarely-used Gideon Park on Grow Avenue is less than seven blocks from the proposed park purchase, and already provides picnic areas, a garden and open space.

The extensive Waterfront Park area is just a one mile walk down Madison Avenue, and it already provides ample community amenities, as well as access to the waters of Puget Sound. The former strawberry factory property also boasts a lovely waterfront setting right in Winslow, and it, too, is less than one mile from the proposed park purchase on Madison Avenue. How much walk-to open space does a town the size of Winslow really need?

It is important to consider the math for this levy. The assessed value of the land is $1.8 million dollars, but the levy is for $6.2 million, a difference of $4.4 million. There is no wording in the levy that indicates how the money will be spent. (In fact, if toxins are discovered to be on the land, the park department can withdraw from the sale, but that would be after the election.)

The selling price of the land is reported to be $347.826 per acre, but since the assessor has stated that only 5.7 acres of the land is usable (the rest being wetlands) this means the cost to taxpaying islanders is actually $500,000 per acre; by all measures an unreasonable amount.

Over 50 percent of the island’s population is made up of senior citizens past retirement age. This levy is for a total of $6.2 million to be repaid over 20 years, making it about $8 million with interest. Can your aging friends and neighbors pay for this significant land purchase without being forced to move away from here in order to live comfortably on a fixed income? Are you concerned about affordable housing? The size and duration of this levy is certain to affect our local rental rates, driving prices ever-higher.

The signs supporting this park levy adeptly pull at your heart strings, and all of us enjoy nature and the outdoors, or we wouldn’t live here. But this particular levy, for this particular property, is ill-advised. Please use your critical thinking skills, and vote NO with your head on this over-reaching park levy.

DEE DUMONT

Grow Avenue